Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Pro, such as the D3. Clearly aimed at pros, big, heavy, and emphasis on image quality

Prosumer, such as the D200 and D300. Suitable for some pros, well built, very good image quality

Advanced amateur, Currently the aging D80. Not as well built, fewer features than the prosumer, but pretty much the same image quality

Amateur, D40 and D60. Entry level to slightly better, aimed at people who want to take good pictures without an excessive amount of effort.

Here is where I see it going. In general, I expect the number of megapixels on digital cameras to creep up, regardless of the segment. Hopefully sensors and image processing will increase at the same rate so we will have a net win.

On the pro level I think Nikon will stick with full-frame (FF or as Nikon calls it, FX). The increase in image quality is too much to give up on. I think they will have two cameras, one lower megapixel, with large photos-sites, fast, great image quality, great for sports and low light. This is where the D3 is now. The second camera will be an answer to Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III, Full frame, smaller photosites, high resolution. Aimed at pros who aren't doing low light or action. Nikon doesn't currently have a camera in this segment, but I would expect them to have one soon, probably using a sensor based on the new Sony 25mp sensor. Prices will be $3,000-6,000 on introduction.

Prosumer cameras are aimed at less demanding pros, as backup cameras for pros and people who have photography as a serious hobby. the Dx00 cameras fill this segment, the D300 being the current one. I think Nikon will stick with the APS-C (1.5 crop factor) sensors here. There is a huge cost advantage that isn't going away. Since the sensor size is fixed, you don't get the Moore's law curve bringing prices down. Build quality won't be up to the pro line, but will be very good, with metal chassis and weather sealing. Great for the amateur who takes the camera out regardless of the weather. Prices will be $1,600-1,800 on introduction.

Advanced Amateur. Still for people who really like photography. lesser build than the Prosumer cameras, fewer features, but still more than most people use, image quality on par with the prosumer cameras, but about a year behind. The D80 currently is in this segment, but will probably be refreshed with a D90 that has the same sensor as the D300 by the end of the year.

Amateur. People who want good quality pictures, but don't want to spend a huge amount of time learning photography and fiddling with settings. People who are stepping up from a point and shoot, or people who are on a limited budget. Currently both the D40 and D60 are in this segment, but it is a big segment with diverse needs Nikon could introduce even more cameras here, in the film days they had 5 or 6 on the market with slightly different feature sets (but the same image quality, since it was film). I expect a camera at a cheaper price point than the D40 (either a D30, or continued price reductions on the D40).

Sensors in the next few years.

Sensors are a specialty product, expensive to design, a limited useful lifetime,and relatively low volume, Thus, outside the pro line, Nikon will leverage the same sensor across many products. Cameras with price differences of hundreds of dollars will have the same sensor. Remember, in the film days, all cameras used the same sensor (the film), so the low-end $250 camera could take the same quality pictures as the $1000+ pro body, the only difference was features. It worked then, no reason to think it wouldn't work now. At any given time I expect the lineup to look roughly like this:

Pro: FX high megapixel sensor

Pro: FX low megapixel sensor

Prosumer: high MP DX

Advanced Amateur: same sensor as prosumer

Amateur: at the high end, same sensor as prosumer, at the low end, an older generation, slightly lower MP sensor

You could easily have 5 different bodies targeted at different market segments and only have two sensors different sensors. Of course, since Nikon doesn't refresh all the cameras at the same time, you will see the new sensors come in on the prosumer line and trickle down over the course of a year or two to the other segments.

Megapixel predictions

As the number of megapixels goes up, they noise goes up (given a similar generation process, new generations often are slightly better for the same number of megapixels). The value of each pixel goes down too. going from 6MP to 8MP is a one third increase in the number of pixels, but the increase in the printable image you get goes up much more slowly. A 6MP camera is 3000x2000 pixels, at 300dpi you can print it at a size of 10x6.7 inches, an 8MP camera is 3456x2304, at 300dpi you get 11.5x7.7 inches. That's it, only an inch and a half wider. As the megapixels go up, the increase is even less impressive. A 12MP camera has 4288x2848 pixels, the Pentax K20 has 14.5 MP which gives it a resolution of 4672x3104. That is only 384 pixels wider, or about an inch and a quarter at 300dpi.

This won't stop them from slowly increasing the MP and people getting excited. I expect on the DX front that they will increase the number of MP by 2 or 2.5 MP every other year.

Model number predictions.

Nikon is running out of model numbers. for the pro line, they have DN where N is a single digit, at the D3 they still have a ways to go. The Prosumer line is DN00, again where N is a single number. At D300 they still have room there too. At the Advanced Amateur and Amateur level they are really in trouble. They have already used the D40, D50, D60, D70, and D80. Most people expect the D90 to come out this year. The D50, and D70 aren't available anymore, and the D80 is on the way out. They could come out with a new low-end model and call it the D30, but they really need to either change their numbering scheme or stop giving them a new number every time they bring out a new camera.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Part of Stouffer's Lean Cusine casual eating classics menu. A single serving pizza with chunky tomatoes, garlic, basil, and tomato sauce with extra virgin olive oil. Pizza usually has lots of cheese, thus, lots of fat. Doing pizza the low-fat way is tough. If you look at the picture on the box, the pizza shows lots of cheese. That is deceptive, there isn't very much cheese on the pizza, and what cheese there was, wasn't evenly spread out. There is lots of crust (it is deep dish afterall) a reasonable amount of tomato sauce and diced tomatos, aand a little bit of cheese. The box said to put it in for 2:30 to 3:30, but for an extra crispy crust, put it in for an extra 30 seconds. I like crispy, so I cooked it for 3:30, which ended up drying the crust out (but it was crispy) I probably should have cooked it a little less. (lesson learned). The pizza itself was decent, you wouldn't confuse it for pizza parlor pizza, or even pizza delivery, it still has lots of calories for what you get, with a 25% coming from fat. If you really crave pizza, this could fit the bill, but I wouldn't make it part of my regular menu. (320 calories; 9g fat; 48g carbs; 14g protein; 23% sodium; 6 weight watchers points)